I 100% agree. Every element of the physics engine felt like it actually had weight to it. The driving physics were predictable, especially if you have any experience with sim driving/racing titles. It wasn't a simulation, but the cause and effect aspects were as good as we'll probably ever get in a game like GTA. Passenger cars drove like barges, sports cars were agile and snappy. It wasn't some canned effect, it was actually down to approximations of a tire model and suspension dynamics.

GTA V feels like every car is the same baseline slot car with tweaked effects to try and provided some level of difference between vehicles. The inertia is bad. Accidents have minor consequences compared to GTA IV. The damage model in IV is vastly superior as well.

[–] Tanoh@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Accidents have minor consequences compared to GTA IV.

I agree with you I much prefered the driving in 4 over any other that I can remember. However, one really weird thing was that sometimes you could hit a curb at relatively low speed and you would fly through the windshield. Other times you were totally indestructable.

[–] SilverFlame@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

Gotta wait a sec for Niko to put on his seat belt

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

Every element of the physics engine felt like it actually had weight to it.

This is a great description of what I think I liked the most about it, yeah. It's weird though because a similar thing could probably be said about Red Read Redemption 2, and I hate that game's controls.